Yesterday a short notice of Judge Payne's decision in favor of St. Hedwig Parish was given; today we wish to give full details of the case.

Jacob Dziewior at al vs. Catholic Bishop of Chicago

In order not to be accused of being biased, we are giving a reprint of the affair from the columns of the Chicago Dispatch, a local paper printed in English, which cannot be accused of favoritism toward the Archbishop.

Judge Payne cannot be accused of favoritism either. He is a Methodist, as the readers of the translated article will see for themselves, and a jurist who is only concerned about logical reasoning; he sticks to every letter of the law and does not allow it to be taken for granted that the defendant is guilty just because he is accused.

2

The facts in this case were so plainly presented by the plaintiff that Judge Payne did not wish to hear from the defense. He expressed his indignation at those who brought the charges against the Archbishop.

The article reads as follows:

"St. Hedwig Church will be formally opened Sunday next by Father Muldoon, and Reverend Eugene Sedlaczek will be established as pastor of the parish. The dissenters, as they have come to be known, were thoroughly routed by Judge Payne this morning, and the Catholic Bishop of Chicago was declared to have legal title to the church property until such title is successfully attacked in a court of justice. It did not take the judge long to reach this conclusion, and he then dissolved the temporary injunction issued last week, which prevented the reopening of the church last Sunday.

"The court held in brief that the right of the Bishop to say who should be placed as priest in charge of a parish in his diocese was absolute, and that 3a court of justice had no right to interfere with such a rule of the church. The only thing the court could hear and determine in the controversy was the respective property rights of the parties to the suit. Provided that after a full hearing the title now held by the Bishop to St. Hedwig Parish should be found to be worthless, then the court might enjoin the Bishop from in any way interfering with the conduct of affairs at the church, but until then he could not do so without being an interloper and subjecting himself to just criticism.

"The court also exhorted the attorney for the complainants to tell his clients that they were to make no disturbance if the Bishop should decide to open the church next Sunday.

"The conclusion of the court was reached without any arguments on the part of the defendant's counsel, after having asked the attorney for the complainants only a few questions. The bill filed by Jacob Dziewior and others was not dismissed, and the court told their attorney that he could renew the action 4when he saw fit. As the document asks for an accounting against the Bishop for money raised to clear the church debt the question of title can be raised and determined by the court.

"When the case was called attorney Max Kasmar [also Kaczmarek], representing the faction he himself called the dissenters, stated that he had not had time to secure the affidavits necessary to a hearing. He did, however, present several hundred printed affidavits in which many people with unponounceable names stated that they had contributed thirteen dollars, more or less, to the establishment of St. Hedwig Church.

"Counter affidavits were filed showing that the dissenters had nothing to do with the establishment of the church and that most of them belonged to the new church, which is known as "All Saints."

"When the attorney said he was not ready to proceed, the court stated that the complainants must always be ready to maintain an injunction.

5

"'I have felt,' said the court, 'that this matter ought to be officially determined in some way so that the people could understand it and so that there would be no more trouble there.'

"The attorney for the complainants then stated that John L. Manning, who had given the deed to the Bishop, had stated that he would swear he did not deal with the Bishop and only made the deed out to him at the request of the parishioners. He also charged Father [Joseph] Barzynski with taking some of the parishioners downtown seven years ago, getting them drunk and then inducing them to sign a petition to have the property conveyed to the Bishop.

"'Has the title been in the name of the Bishop for seven years, and has he been conducting the affairs of this church that long?' asked the court.

"'He has, your honor."

"'Has not the bishop absolute authority regarding who shall be priest of a church?

6

I know it is so in the Methodist church, and to protest the decision of the Bishop is like protesting the decision of a court.'

"'I suppose that is so, your honor, and the cause of the trouble here was the obstinacy of the Bishop in this regard. These complainants do not want a priest of the Resurrectionists' Order.'

"'This court cannot assume to be a better Bishop than the Bishop himself. If the complainants have any legal property rights they have come to the right place to have them determined, but the court has no right to interfere with the Bishop by upholding an injunction until this property right has been determined. If, therefore, your people cause a riot and bloodshed in this church they are simply disloyal citizens and entitled to no sympathy from this court. If they wish to rebel against the authority of the Bishop let them retire as peaceful citizens from the church and go their own way, but do not let them overrule all law and order. I wish you would convey to them as clearly as you can what the court has said in this regard, for it is your 7duty.'

"The attorney stated that he would do so, but intimated that it might do no good in preventing future riots.

"Father Muldoon was greatly pleased with the decision of the court and felt that it would put an end to the unseemly rioting that had disgraced the church in the past.

"'I shall open St. Hedwig Church on next Sunday,' he said, 'and after what the court said, I do not expect any serious trouble. No, we shall not ask for police protection, but if there is any likelihood of trouble we will wait until another time.

"' It is not likely that the complainants will be able to overthrow the title of the Bishop to the property, and so far as the courts are concerned the St. Hedwig Church fight can be considered as settled.'"

8

So much for the article in the Dispatch. The dissenters of St. Hedwig Church must now decide whether they wish to continue as irresponsible citizens of the country or to realize that neither the civil courts nor the authorities of the Church will lend an ear to their demands.

If they still wish to waste money in finding legal tricks to carry on their charges--their attempts will bring them nothing more than shame and embarrassment--let them do so, because that will be proof that they are not only non-Catholics and disloyal citizens but that they are also lacking in the slightest trace of common sense.

The only benefit will be reaped by the attorney.